Evans v. Lott
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Complaint; from city court of Douglas—-Judge Frier. August 27, 1919. Lott sued Evans on a promissory note for $175. The defendant admitted the execution of the note, and pleaded that the note was without consideration, for the reason that after its execution the contract under which it was given was rescinded. It appears that there have been three transactions between the parties to this litigation.
Read the full summary
Complaint; from city court of Douglas—-Judge Frier. August 27, 1919. Lott sued Evans on a promissory note for $175. The defendant admitted the execution of the note, and pleaded that the note was without consideration, for the reason that after its execution the contract under which it was given was rescinded. It appears that there have been three transactions between the parties to this litigation. In the first Evans gave to Lott his note for $100 as boot in a horse-swap; in the second horse-swap, in which Lott received back the horse first received by Evans, Lott received an additional $75…
1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.)
There is really very little actual conflict' in the evidence as given by the plaintiff and the defendant in this case. The evidence for the plaintiff as given on direct examination would, we think, have been sufficient to have sustained his case as laid; but upon going into details as to the transaction, in his evidence given on cross-examination, the plaintiff makes it to plainly appear that the horse described in the 'note was brought back to him (the seller), under and in accordance with his contract of warranty; that the defendant, on bringing it back…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Fisher v. WhitehurstCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1914
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bradfield v. GardnerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1979